139 responses to “Paying for Tax Cuts: Whose Money Is It?”

  1. Thuy Cabbagestalk

    Wow, this article is good, my sister is analyzing these things, so I am going to convey her.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. http://eon.businesswire.com/news/eon/20120430005790/en/no-no-hair-removal/no-no-no-hair-removal-reviews/trynono

    I ought to test with you here. Which is not one thing I normally do! I enjoy studying a submit that will make folks believe. Also, thanks for allowing me to comment!

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Deirdre Bajdas

    Really it’s called SEO that when i search for this piece of writing I found this site at the top of all web sites in search engine.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Strony warte odwiedzenia

    Hi-Ya! our loved ones just loves your awesome write-up many thanks and pls go on it

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. vets

    You…are…my…hero!!! I cant believe something like this exists on the internet! Its so true, so honest, and more than that you dont sound like an idiot! Finally, someone who knows how to talk about a subject without sounding like a kid who didnt get that bike he wanted for Christmas.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. free mobile porn

    Zune and iPod: Most people compare the Zune to the Touch, but after seeing how slim and surprisingly small and light it is, I consider it to be a rather unique hybrid that combines qualities of both the Touch and the Nano. It’s very colorful and lovely OLED screen is slightly smaller than the touch screen, but the player itself feels quite a bit smaller and lighter. It weighs about 2/3 as much, and is noticeably smaller in width and height, while being just a hair thicker.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. hd televisions

    Thanks for an concept, you sparked at thought at a angle I hadn’t given thoguht to yet. Now lets see if I am able to do a very important factor about it.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. PalemoonSun

    Mr. Paul, why did you allow Bernie Sanders to steal your thunder? Why did it have to take Bernie Sanders, a socialist Senator, to do what you yourself was too scared to do? It was Bernie Sanders, NOT YOU, who passed legislation to audit the Fed and require transparency from them. I suppose that is why you have now shut up your stupid rants about the Fed?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  9. PalemoonSun

    I find it interesting that Ron Paul cites a man, Orwell, who volunteered to serve in WWII to defend socialism and nearly paid for it with his life, having been shot in the throat by a sniper.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. PalemoonSun

    I find it interesting that Ron Paul cites a man, Orwell, who fought for and nearly gave his life, defending socialism. ;-)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. NassimHarameinVedas

    Ron Paul should write more books . . .

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. NassimHarameinVedas

    Ron Paul should write more books . . .

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Nathan

    “Maybe we should all continue to just quietly hand over all of our earnings to the government in the form of taxes, so that they can in turn give it to the wealthy…”

    Garry, did you even read the statement at the top? This comment would make sense if Ron Paul was supporting taxation, supporting bailouts for large corporations, (or for other state enforced monopoly status of certain large businesses through business “regulations”, etc.) but he supports the exact opposite on both accounts. His article is in direct opposition to people “handing over their earnings to the government” to be given to someone else. Maybe if you had read it, you wouldn’t be as hopelessly confused about the difference between taking money through taxation (i.e. threatening to steal at gunpoint in a future swat raid, etc) and the very opposite – the government NOT taking your money – by giving you a “break” and refraining from / stealing less of your or your neighbors money. You are repeating the rediculous logical fallacy that your money is being GIVEN to someone else if someone gets a tax break. That is patently absurd, it is their money, not yours.

    And according to you, the wealthy get their money not from voluntary mutually agreed upon market based exchanges such as job creation, but instead from “tax breaks”. “The wealthy people of today no longer create jobs, they invest in Wall Street scams that enable them to make more wealth from the tax breaks that are provided off of the backs of the working class!”

    I don’t know how anyone can say something so completely illogical. What is the justice of the case? If I run a mafia protection racket and I come to your house once a month with armed henchmen and collect $500 from money you earn elsewhere, and then I have a sudden gracious change of heart and decide to only collect $300 every month from you at gunpoint out of the money you earn elsewhere, the $200 difference in relation to the mafia can in no way be considered income coming from and belonging to the mafia, or more absurd – as if the $200 belongs to some other person justifying the mafia stealing it from you.

    Income can’t be stolen unless you already have income to begin with, and you certainly aren’t “making money” from being robbed less. You don’t have to be educated to understand these simple truths.

    Not only is it more efficient and practical, but true justice means that the individuals who earn money through voluntary, non-coercive means should ideally be able to keep and determine the proper use of such money according to their conscience, experience, will and interests. The chains are being put around your and my necks by those clamoring so loudly for these corruptible self interested central planning government rulers to steal from you and your neighbors and presume to use it as they see fit, instead of the individuals themselves, through the voluntary market exchanges according to the interests of the proper owners of such income.

    Government is organized violence. Violence is only justified in defense of the individual to be free in his person and other property, not for forced wealth redistribution and other social planning.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    1. WE THE PEOPLE

      “The wealthy people of today no longer create jobs, they invest in Wall Street scams that enable them to make more wealth from the tax breaks that are provided off of the backs of the working class!”

      He does have a great point there!
      Take for instance all those jobs that were supposed to be created by the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. Where are those jobs? In what country? Because Bush’s legacy includes high unemployment for the U.S. of A.

      And lets face one painfully obvious,overly simple fact about the next election-
      If the voter is middle class and still fortunate enough to have a 40 hr/week job there are two things that will factor into how he or she votes: JOBS and a LIVING WAGE. By a “living wage” I’m not talking about subsistence wages for “manufacturing” a hamburger. I’m talking about erasing some of the class stratification between the CEOs and the folks that actually work thereby creating wealth for the “Neutron” Jack Welchs of the world.
      Anybody that steps away from party ideology and looks around at the current political landscape should easily identify that the biggest issue is always going to gravitate toward JOBS.AMERICAN JOBS!
      Another disturbing fact is that both parties have generally ignored the issue of JOBS. From Clinton screwing the AMERICAN working class to Bush being an arrogant elite and therefore totally disconnected from anyone not a Skull & Bones member, nobody has done jack about the evaporation(outsourcing) of AMERICAN JOBS! Obama hasn’t effectively addressed the issue. Shouldn’t that present a wide open vulnerability that would be sure to motivate the unemployed, under-employed, and underpaid to vote for a candidate that recognizes it?
      It’s the hot-button issue that nobody really wants to address either through ignorance, cowardice, or corporate greed.

      And don’t under-estimate the lingering resentment over the bailout of the Wall Street casinos! People have not forgotten!!

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. AJ JONES

    THIS WAS MY BIRTHDAY.
    IT LOOKS LIKE ILL ONLY HAVE 2 MORE B-4 D-DAY, DEC.21 2012.
    AT LEAST WE WILL BE ABLE TO ELECT RON, RIGHT B-4 THE END TOO.
    }8 ? )

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. 13AJJONES

    THIS WAS MY BIRTHDAY.
    IT LOOKS LIKE ILL ONLY HAVE 2 MORE B-4 D-DAY, DEC.21 2012.
    AT LEAST WE WILL BE ABLE TO ELECT RON, RIGHT B-4 THE END TOO.
    }8 ? )

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

  16. geehuckwow

    Taxation is the theft of money indirect or not. Rape is the theft of sex, indirect or not. They both are theft and theft is bad, it is waste and waste is not economical. Tax/theft necessarily leads to poverty and will eliminate all decent people. Look at any major city in the world. Folks making a living off taxes (teachers, politicians, judges) are the most likely to promote tax. Tax is abuse and wrong.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. NCIcaucus

    Dear Dr. Paul, please see our videos at ICaucus (dot) org under the media tab at top and then articles. We are The independence Caucus and came from Jason Chaffetz’s 2008 campaign in which he had no paid staff and an all volunteer staff.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Osher Doctorow Ph.D.

    “Disillusioned” now claims that she was referring to the 16th Amendment (not to mention Article I) on Taxes, and asks whether I am opposed to Taxes in general (in my words). I am opposed to Taxes (and anything else that helps Dictators) during a Dictatorship (Obama’s). When we get rid of the Dictatorship, then we can use Taxes in accord with the Intents of the Founding Fathers to provide (in the Jeffersonian sense) MINIMAL GOVERNMENT. If “Disillusioned” claims that the Founding Fathers forgot to mention “minimal”, then God forgot to mention the Obomination in the Bible, but I am sure that God opposes Obama nevertheless. In fact, God forgot to mention the New World Order (NWO), but God is against the NWO. God assumes that we have brains, like Jefferson, though this is beginning to look very over-optimistic.

    Osher Doctorow

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. Osher Doctorow Ph.D.

    “Disillusioned” asked my why I regard the Tax Money as THEFT, since according to her it goes to our Military and DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) of the Civilian Defense Department, among other places. What do you mean, it goes to our “Military”? Our Founding Fathers would declare the OBOMINATION a Dictatorship and urge the Military to resign rather than serve under a Dictator who opposes the Intents of the Founding Fathers and Judeo-Christianity. Obama is a NO-MILITARY-SERVICE Dunce, Ignoramus, tool of the New World Order, who unbelievably is Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces. Our Founding Fathers would throw him out on his ear(s). As for DARPA, the Academia Mafia of the NWO has so pedalled USA education and research backwards, that DARPA can’t possibly make up for our Quantitative Researh Inventiveness for example compared to several 95% white nations of Europe including the U.K., Italy, Greece, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland, Poland, Czech Republic, arguably Netherlands, or Australia, or the 95% or more Asian Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, or even Israel or India or Brazil. See the repositories online of stored quantitative papers from 1991 through today, arXiv and Front for the Mathematics ArXiv.

    Osher Doctorow

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Disillusioned

      Actually I questioned why you call it theft when the 16th amendment to our constitution says “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

      Is there any government for which you feel it is worth paying? Or are you suggesting we shouldn’t have any government?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Libertarian777

        to respond to you (not really sure I understand the poster prior to you)…

        Ron Paul and libertarians are not against ‘government’ per se. We are against LARGE SCALE CENTRALISED government.
        Sounds like a paradox but read that again.

        We are not wanting the FEDERAL government to mandate everything. This whole concept of ‘super intelligent’ people living in ivory towers in DC who know exactly what we need in each and every community is poppycock.

        LOCAL government is where its at.

        The problem currently is the federal government is so big, a lot of states accede to the Fed’s demands (or get special privileges ala Nebraska in Obamacare).

        And the constitution, although the original intent of it was to limit government, the federal government, along with the courts (see e.g. Slaughterhouse case) have expanded the ‘limited government’ restrictions the constitution placed. How for example does the ‘interstate commerce’ clause affect a farmer who’s growing his own feed, to feed his own livestock to sell in his own community? (Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942))

        I’d rather have my local city government determine whether to spend more on education vs healthcare. That way a ‘younger’ city would allocate more resources to education and child care, whereas a city of retired folk can devote more to hospice care and the such. It’s a lot easier for me (and everyone else) to get involved on a local scale, without the need for massive spending to get elected to e.g. a congressional seat. Where the federal government should get involved should be strictly limited to interstate disputes (e.g. interstate trade tariffs), the DEFENSE of the USA (NOT the ‘offense’ of the USA, ala Iraq, Vietnam etc).

        Yes, local governments can and do mess up, go bankrupt etc. But the scope of the damage should be limited to THAT locality, not nationalised (as the federal government is wont to do).

        Putting the 16th Amendment aside for a moment, think about income taxes in general.
        If you go and threaten with force, some person unknown to you, for part of their wage, that is called extortion. Yet the IRS has legal authority to compel you to pay (if you don’t, I can almost guarantee a SWAT raid on your home). They will coerce you to pay through threat of force/jail.

        Taxes should be on a consumption basis. If I drive a car, I should pay for the roads, if I drive more I pay more. How do you enact this? if not through toll rolls, there are other ways (e.g. gasoline tax, used SPECIFICALLY for road maintenance, and NOT ‘general spending’; vehicle licensing fees etc). Yes you will complain, gasoline will go up in price etc., but so will my salary (by 30% since I pay no more income tax). And no, that is NOT ‘inflation’. Inflation is a persistent increase in monetary supply leading to a persistant increase in the price level. A one off adjustment is not inflation.

        We will get better price signals from the market as to what the demand for gasoline, travel and roads are in specific locations. A heavily travelled road will collect more revenue, which can consequently be used to expand/improve the road.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

  20. Osher Doctorow Ph.D.

    Ron Paul is right again. The reader who claims that the tax money goes into the “Economy” is using a Pluralistic Abstract notion fo the Economy. It goes from me and you to somebody else. It’s THEFT! Sure, there’s Charity, but if Charity isn’t voluntary, then how does God judge whether an Individual is Responsible, Moral, Ethical or not in this respect? How does anybody judge it or decide?

    As for the “deficit”, CANCEL Trade with the Enemy (China, Russia, etc.) and their Financial holdings and penetrations in the USA. Close Borders to Job-Stealing Criminal Illegals. Throw the Job-Stealing Criminal U.N. out of the USA. Stop pouring billions of dollars into Afghanistan to “rebuild” and “build political parties” are return it to the taxpayers at home where we’re going broke. Stop handouts abroad to Africa, Asia, Latin America, and on and on, which are literally BRIBERY, but also literally drain our finances. Throw out the FED or Federal Reserve which is our local Liberal Billionaire-Government Frankenstein alliance (BGFA for short), also known as the New World order, although BGFA/NWO also includes the Liberal Billionaire and Government backers of the FED including the Council on Foreign Relations (see online the Wikipedia article on it – not related to “Wikileaks”), the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, the Order of the Skull and Bones, etc.

    Osher Doctorow

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Disillusioned

      I agree the money goes from you and me to someone else. In other words, it doesn’t go into a black hole as Ron Paul described. Again, some of the money from taxpayers goes to Ron Paul, some goes to members of our military, some provides benefits for wounded veterans, some goes to intelligence officers trying to protect us, some goes to private corporations to build roads and bridges, some went to DARPA, which, according to Wikipedia has “been responsible for funding the development of many technologies which have had a major effect on the world”, and on and on. I don’t understand why you consider this theft. Theft is illegal and taxation is legal. If it were theft, would Ron Paul be a thief?

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. hyylo

    why is this guy not president.

    why do americans vote for liars like mccain, palin, clinton, bush and obama. nothing changes.

    ron paul would make america wonderful again.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  22. hyylo

    why is this guy not president.

    why do americans vote for liars like mccain, palin, clinton, bush and obama. nothing changes.

    ron paul would make america wonderful again.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  23. Disillusioned

    Though, I’d never vote for him, I generally enjoy reading Ron Paul’s thoughts. But, I was thoroughly disappointing with this item. Does anyone else feel like Rep Paul simply replaced allegedly meaningless words with his own meaningless words?

    The simple fact is the constitution gives the government the right to collect taxes. It is also quite simply reasonable for the government to collect taxes for the services it provides. The question of “whose money is it” constitutes meaningless words. Once your money is used to pay your tax bill, it is no longer yours just as surely as the money used to pay any bill from a private corporation is no longer yours. I’m guessing one argument is a private corporation cannot compel you use their services. I’m unreceptive to this argument because just as you have choices regarding corporate products/services, you also have 190+ choices about which country you wish to live in.

    Suggesting the $850 billion will be spent, saved, or invested by American citizens rather than being sent into the black hole known as the federal is also a meaningless, if not inaccurate, argument. As Rep Paul is quick to mention, the government spends all the money it collects and then some. Therefore, the money isn’t consumed by some black hole, rather it is returned to the economy in various forms, one of which is Rep Paul’s salary.

    The simple fact is this bill will, at least in the near term, increase the federal deficit. Rep Paul uses the now cliched “spending problem, not revenue problem”. This may or may not be true, but I’d like to see the spending problem fixed before we arbitrarily decide to forego revenue. There seems to be a notion that if the government collects less it will spend less. Hasn’t this notion completely failed?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Nils

      Where do you get this notion that we have 190+ choices about what country to live in? Basically every country in the world makes you go through hoops in order to live AND work there.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Disillusioned

        I’m confident there are more than 190 countries on this planet and I assumed the overwhelming majority have some sort of immigration policy. If I’ve assumed incorrectly, then I’ll change my statement to simply you have plenty of choices. I didn’t imply it would be easy or even practical, but neither is it always in the private market.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    2. Libertarian777

      the question to you is, why does government have to provide these services? There are very very few services we require from the federal government. I’m not talking about the DEPENDENCE we as a society have become accustomed to from the feds, but actual true services we require the Feds to provide that no one else can.

      If there was a need (demand) for a specific service, the market would provide such services.

      At first, you will complain that there is some person out there making large profits by providing this service. But making large profits (barriers to entry aside), leads to competitors entering the market and reducing the profit of the first producer. Ad infinitum until it reaches equilibrium.

      Compare the market for hybrid vehicles (e.g. Prius, Insight) vs a government mandated (GM Volt) vehicle.
      There is a demand for the prius. There is almost no demand for the Volt. Yes, the Tesla sedan might also fail, but private funds are put at risk there, with GM, public funds have been put at risk, to provide this supposed ‘service’ from the government (and electric car) for a need that’s not there.

      The question still remains, ‘whose money is it?’ Did YOU or did the government bureaucrat perform this work for this salary?

      Did you know the UK is looking into having EVERYONE’s salary paid directly to the government. And they will then pay you the balance after tax?
      THAT is true socialism. You are now working for the government. Everything you do is for the government. And the government decides what you may keep.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  24. walenchi1

    Bush tax cuts! Is this a joke. Are these not the same leaders that caused and or encouraged businesses to go abroad while leaving the workers holding the bag, causing a backlash against so called “illegal immigrants” who were being tolerated when the going was good. Those who scream secure the boarder are cowards who don’t want to face the real issue. NAFTA, GATT, war on drugs, war on terrorism and the unpatriotic patriot act. Obama works for Bush. Massage the middle class and all will be well.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  25. walenchi1

    Who is writing a bill to increase minimum wage according to inflation? As much as I do not support taxation without representation, I would like to know who is standing up for the common man. Who?

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  26. Martexas1

    Mr. Paul,

    Neo Cons would turn the idea of limited government around to mean military doesnt get pensions. Its not military personnel breaking the backs of the system, its the special interest weapon programs, contractors making 100,000 plus, etc… Ron Paul our country has been taken over by Psychopaths, Communist and want to be military dicators. People of Good Faith must stand up.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  27. Steve Banicki

    If our free markets were indeed “free” it would be much easier to go along with a lower tax rate for the wealth. With oligopolies in control of many of our major markets, the average citizen is getting a double whammy. Prices for goods and services are higher than they need be because of the destruction of free markets. and the heads of these oligopolies getting egregious salaries with low tax rates.

    The quote below is from the book Capitalism and Freedom written by Milton and Rose Friedman. Dr. Friedman is the economist who is quoted most often when conservatives are praising free markets ans capitalism.

    “But we cannot rely on custom or conscious alone to interpret and enforce the rules; we need an umpire.These then are the basic role of government in a free society; to provide a means where we can modify rules, to mediate differences among us on the meaning of rules, and to enforce compliance with the rules on the part of those few who otherwise would not play the game.”

    For whatever reason, this part of Dr. Friedman’s philosophy is never mentioned when it comes to making “free markets” work.

    Who is at fault that the economy is in a stranglehold by the very large oligopolies that are preventing free enterprise from flourishing in so many of our industries? It is not the corporations.

    Industries like banking, including wall street, insurance, health care, automotive and others are controlled by a small handful of firms that are doing what Adam Smith, the author of Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, advocated. They are pursuing their rational self-interest. The problem is how they are allowed to pursue it.
    http://www.freeourfreemarkets.org/2010/12/oligopolies-who-is-at-fault.html#more

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Tim Elston

      Good post, Steve. I have sometimes considered the idea that “the market” is the universe of all potential action, defining even the People’s action through government to be market action. If graduated taxation is the People’s response to the Plutocracy’s abuse, then graduated taxation is as market-based as is the imbalance it seeks to remedy. Representative democracy itself, even, is a market response to tyranny, if the market is defined to include the People’s action, univerally.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  28. bestwayusa1

    Next thing you will want are Military to not get a pension because there retired and no longer working for us tax payers. And the police, firemen, after all it is our money,right, wrong shame shame Ron. Dont be a hypocrite.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  29. bestwayusa1

    Shame on the Greedy wealthy for they have more than enough, but are not willing to help out there fellow Americans. Let them keep all ther bush tax cuts, favoring there greedy riches. For they are poor at heart and soul. And GOD is watching over them. Remember the movie ghost? I wonder which ones will becoming for them.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Jimbo

      Learn English… and History

      The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
      - Thomas Jefferson

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Brad Slavens

        Jefferson is correct. Right off the bat investors (who don’t work “make your money work for you”) recieve welfare from the workers, who get paid in dollars, because of the artificial inflation caused by deficit spending, which Ron Paul just voted for.

        Cut spending or lower taxes, but most importantly balance the budget so we don’t have to print and borrow and cause inflation to quitely rip off the consumers and pay off investors.

        We are all investors to some extent but if you make more working than you do investing then your getting screwed. It’s an easy vote for the balanced budget.

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  30. Tim Elston

    I completely agree with your point about semantics, Dr. Paul, but, even so, I think it is both within the right of the government to tax on a graduated basis and within reason for highly profitable corporations and their rich executives to pay taxes at a higher rate, in exchange for the favorable legislation that they buy through their lobbying efforts. They purchase our representatives’ votes with election campaign contributions only because there is a significant return on that lobbying investment.

    Since our representatives are, in effect, agents of the corporations who buy their votes, it is reasonable to impose a higher tax rate on the corporations in order to support “the general Welfare,” which is shortchanged both by Congress being bought by corporations and by the revolving door that exists between public office and corporate representation. Corporations could not make the profits they make, executives could not be paid the salaries they get paid, and shareholders could not make the returns they achieve without the labor force at their disposal, without the favorable legislation they buy from Congress, and without the system itself.

    Graduated taxation is a means by which the working class can stanch the effectively non-representative redistribution of the value of their labor upwards into the mits of the corporations and super-rich. Since, as you argue, semantics matter, graduated taxation is a means by which the working class can take back the value of its labor from those in positions of power who have unreasonably diminished labor’s value through plutocratic legislation and the corporate-congressional relationship that has effectively circumvented the interests of the People, who constitutionally ought to be represented but practically are not.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Brad Slavens

      Well said Tim.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  31. audiohi

    Probably THE wisest politician in the last 100 years.. at least.

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  32. Woopa

    I applaud Ron’s succinct untangling of the mainstream media’s lastest and most pathetic knot.

    Unless your “income” comes from Federally privileged activities you DO NOT HAVE TO PAY INCOME TAX. Visit http://www.losthorizons.com for a full explaination (NOT merely a moral/Constitutional rebuttal; an actual explaination of what the Income Tax Act really is)

    Report this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    1. Brad Slavens

      If your rich in America chances are you’ve received some federal privilege. Name someone who hasn’t.

      Report this comment

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      1. Woopa

        This does not appear to be a “reply” to anything I’ve said above

        Report this comment

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply